WASHINGTON (AP)  House GOP leaders on Wednesday postponed the renewal of the 1965 Voting Rights Act under objections from Southern Republicans who complained during a private meeting that the legislation unfairly singles out their states for federal oversight, a leadership aide said.

The act, passed to end racist voting practices, had been set for a House vote Wednesday on its renewal, with Republican and Democratic leaders behind it.

It was unclear whether the objections could be resolved this year, said the aide, who spoke on condition of anonymity because the decision had not yet been made public.

The temporary portions of the 1965 law expire next year, and it was unclear whether the objections could be resolved during this year of midterm elections, in which House leaders of both parties hope to use the bill to advance their prospects at the polls.

Leaders of both parties support the legislation, which was approved by the Judiciary Committee on a 33-1 vote. Despite their support, controversy has shadowed the legislation 40 years after it first prohibited policies that blocked blacks from voting.

Several Southern Republicans, led by Rep. Lynn Westmoreland of Georgia, had worked to allow an amendment that would ease a requirement that nine states win permission from the Justice Department or a federal judge to change their voting rules.

Westmoreland says the formula for deciding which states are subject to such "pre-clearance" should be updated every four years and be based on voter turnout in the most recent three elections.

"The pre-clearance portions of the Voting Rights Act should apply to all states, or no states," Westmoreland said. "Singling out certain states for special scrutiny no longer makes sense."

The amendment has powerful opponents. From Republican and Democratic leaders on down the House hierarchy, they argue that states with documented histories of discrimination may still practice it and have earned the extra scrutiny.

The overwhelming support for the bill was foreshadowed by the Judiciary Committee's 33-1 vote last month to report the renewal to the full House.

"This carefully crafted legislation should remain clean and unamended," Rep. John Conyers, D-Mich., who worked on the original bill, which he called "the keystone of our national civil rights statutes."

By his own estimation, Westmoreland says the amendment stands little chance of being adopted.

The House also could bring up an amendment that would require the Justice Department to compile an annual list of jurisdictions eligible for a "bailout" from the pre-clearance requirements.

That amendment, too, has little chance of surviving the floor debate, leaving the underlying bill likely to pass the House. The Senate is scheduled to consider an identical bill later this year.

Other efforts to chip away at the act have faltered under pressure from powerful supporters.

One such measure, sponsored by Rep. Steve King, R-Iowa, would have stripped a provision that requires ballots to be printed in several languages and interpreters be provided in states and counties where large numbers of citizens speak limited English.

"It seems sort of redundant to have both of those provisions," said Rep. Phil Gingrey, R-Ga. He added that any foreign-speaking voter must prove some English proficiency to win citizenship.

However, Judiciary Committee Chairman James Sensenbrenner, R-Wis., called that logic an effort to mix the divisive debate over immigration reform with the Voting Rights Act renewal. Three-fourths of those whose primary language is not English are American-born, he said.

"They grew up here. They need the help," said Sensenbrenner, using Puerto Rican natives as examples. "They are just as entitled as everyone else to understanding the ballot."

The bill is H.R. 9

Copyright 2006 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This
material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.